The 50th percentile of the general population single eating occasion intake of food is optimal for the calculation of action levels for precautionary allergen labelling.

Lack of guidance regarding selection of food intake values for allergen risk assessment can lead to different outcomes for similar levels of allergens in food products. Several food consumption survey databases (United States, North-West Europe, and Netherlands) were analyzed to identify optimal food intake percentiles using a sensitivity analysis. Deterministic risk assessment scenarios using the 50th percentile up to the maximum intake per food group were compared with probabilistic risk assessment outcomes. The optimal intake percentile is the lowest percentile that results in a deterministic risk assessment outcome compliant with the predefined safety objective, i.e., the predefined risk of an objective allergic reaction at ED01, ED2.5, ED05 or ED10 doses of 14 allergenic foods. The P50 intake met these criteria in more than 99.9% of all 28,784 scenarios tested. The P50 is therefore recommended for deterministic allergen risk assessment and calculation of action levels for precautionary allergen labelling. In case a P50 value is not available, the mean is a good alternative, as analyses of the intake data showed that the mean generally is between the P50 and P65.

Co-sensitization between legumes is frequently seen, but variable and not always clinically relevant.

Background: Food allergy to peanut and soybean, both legumes, is highly prevalent. The consumption of other legumes and legume protein isolates, some of which may be considered novel foods, is increasing. This may lead to an increase in sensitization and allergy and may pose a risk for legume-allergic (e.g. peanut and soybean) patients due to cross-reactivity. Objective: This study investigated the frequency of co-sensitization and co-allergy between legumes and the role of different protein families. Methods: Six legume-allergic patient groups were included: peanut (n = 30), soybean (n = 30), lupine (n = 30), green pea (n = 30), lentil (n = 17), bean (n = 9). IgE binding to total extracts, protein fractions (7S/11S globulin, 2S albumin, albumin), and 16 individual proteins from 10 legumes (black lentil, blue lupine, chickpea, faba bean, green lentil, pea, peanut, soybean, white bean, and white lupine) was measured by line blot. Results: Co-sensitization varied from 36.7% to 100%. Mono-sensitization was only found in soybean (16.7%), peanut (10%), and green pea-allergic (3.3%) patients. A high frequency of co-sensitization between the 7S/11S globulin fractions of all 10 legumes and individual 7S and 11S globulins was observed. In peanut and soybean-allergic patients, co-allergies for other legumes were uncommon (≤16,7%), while in green pea, lupine, lentil, and bean-allergic patients co-allergy for peanut (64.7%-77.8%) or soybean (50%-64.7%) was frequently seen. Conclusion: Co-sensitization between legumes was high, but generally not clinically relevant. Co-allergy to other legumes was not often seen in peanut- and soybean allergic patients. The 7S and 11S globulins were likely responsible for the observed co-sensitization.

Accidental allergic reactions to food in adolescents and adults: An overview of the factors involved and implications for prevention.

Accidental allergic reactions to food are one of the major problems in adult patients diagnosed with food allergy. Such reactions occur frequently, are often severe and are associated with higher medical and non-medical costs. The aim of this Perspective is to provide insight into the different factors involved in the occurrence of accidental allergic reactions and to present an overview of practical implications for effective preventive measures. Several factors affect the occurrence of accidental reactions. These factors are related to the patient, health care, or food. The most important patient-related factors are age, social barriers to disclosing their allergy and non-adherence to the elimination diet. With regards to healthcare, the degree to which clinical practice is tailored to the individual patient is an important factor. The major food-related factor is the absence of adequate precautionary allergen labeling (PAL) guidelines. Since many factors are involved in accidental allergic reactions, different preventive strategies are needed. It is highly recommended that health care be tailored to the individual patient, with regard to education about the elimination diet, support on behavioral and psychosocial aspects, usage of shared decision-making and taking into account health literacy. In addition, it is crucial that steps are taken to improve policies and guidelines for PAL.

Updated full range of Eliciting Dose values for Cow's milk for use in food allergen risk assessment.

Access to Eliciting Doses (ED) for allergens enables advanced food allergen risk assessment. Previously, the full ED range for 14 allergenic foods, including milk, and recommendations for their use were provided (Houben et al., 2020). Additional food challenge studies with cow's milk-allergic patients added 247 data points to the original dataset. Using the Stacked Model Averaging statistical method for interval-censored data on the 697 individual NOAELs and LOAELs for milk generated an updated full ED distribution. The ED01 and ED05, the doses at which 1% and 5% of the milk-allergic population would be predicted to experience any objective allergic reaction, were 0.3 and 3.2 mg milk protein for the discrete and 0.4 mg and 4.3 mg milk protein for the cumulative dose distribution, respectively. These values are slightly higher but remain within the 95% confidence interval of previously published EDs. We recommend using the updated EDs for future characterization of risks of exposure of milk-allergic individuals to milk protein. This paper contributes to the discussion on the Reference Dose for milk in the recent Ad hoc Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Risk Assessment of Food Allergens. It will also benefit harmonization of food allergen risk assessment and risk management globally.

Reproducibility of food challenge to cow's milk: Systematic review with individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cow's milk (CM) is an increasingly common cause of severe allergic reactions, but there is uncertainty with respect to severity of reactions at low-level CM exposure, as well as the reproducibility of reaction thresholds. OBJECTIVE: We undertook an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of studies reporting double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges in CM to determine the rate of anaphylaxis to low-level exposures and the reproducibility of reaction thresholds. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and IPD meta-analysis of studies reporting relevant data. Authors were contacted to provide additional data and/or clarification as needed. Risk of bias was assessed using the National Institute for Clinical Excellence methodologic checklists. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were included, representing data from over 1000 participants. The cumulative ED01 and ED05 (cumulative doses causing objective symptoms in 1% and 5% of the at-risk allergic population) were 0.3 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2-0.5) and 2.9 (95% CI, 1.6-5.4) mg, respectively. At meta-analysis, 4.8% (95% CI, 2.0-10.9) and 4.8% (95% CI, 0.7-27.1) of individuals reacting to ≤5 mg and ≤0.5 mg of CM protein had anaphylaxis (minimal heterogeneity, I2 = 0%). Then 110 individuals underwent repeat double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges; the intraindividual variation in reaction threshold was limited to a ½-log change in 80% (95% CI, 65-89) of participants. Two individuals initially tolerated 5 mg CM protein but then reacted to this dose at a subsequent challenge, although neither had anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: About 5% of CM-allergic individuals reacting to ED01 or ED05 exposure might have anaphylaxis to that dose. This equates to 5 and 24 anaphylaxis events per 10,000 patients exposed to an ED01 or ED05 dose, respectively, in the broader CM-allergic population. Most of these anaphylactic reactions would be mild and respond to a single dose of epinephrine.

Low dietary adherence after a positive food challenge in food allergic adults.

BACKGROUND: After a positive food challenge (FC), patients receive dietary advice regarding avoidance of the culprit food. We examined the frequency and variables associated with dietary adherence after a positive FC in adults. METHODS: In this prospective daily practice study, adults with a positive FC were included. After every FC, dietary advice was given consisting of three options: (1) strict avoidance, (2) avoidance but products with precautionary allergen labelling (PAL) allowed and (3) (small) amounts allowed. Questionnaires about dietary adherence and associated variables were completed prior to and 6 months after the FC(s). RESULTS: 41 patients (with 58 positive FCs) were included. Overall, patients adhered to the advised diet after 31% of the FCs. After 33 FCs, the advice was strict avoidance, whereof 82% followed a less strict diet. After 16 FCs, the advice was avoidance but products with PAL allowed, whereof 19% followed a less strict and 25% a stricter diet. In 9 FCs with the least strict advice, "(small) amounts allowed'', 67% followed a stricter diet. Three variables were associated with adherence: misremembering dietary advice, impaired health-related quality of life (HRQL) on domain "Emotional impact'' and the need for dietary change after the FC. CONCLUSION: After one third of the positive FCs, patients adhered to the dietary advice. Variables associated with adherence were misremembering dietary advice, impaired HRQL on domain "Emotional impact'' and the need for dietary change after the FC. It seems important that healthcare professionals should more frequently apply adherence-enhancing strategies to improve dietary adherence.

Peanut Can Be Used as a Reference Allergen for Hazard Characterization in Food Allergen Risk Management: A Rapid Evidence Assessment and Meta-Analysis.

Regional and national legislation mandates the disclosure of "priority" allergens when present as an ingredient in foods, but this does not extend to the unintended presence of allergens due to shared production facilities. This has resulted in a proliferation of precautionary allergen ("may contain") labels (PAL) that are frequently ignored by food-allergic consumers. Attempts have been made to improve allergen risk management to better inform the use of PAL, but a lack of consensus has led to variety of regulatory approaches and nonuniformity in the use of PAL by food businesses. One potential solution would be to establish internationally agreed "reference doses," below which no PAL would be needed. However, if reference doses are to be used to inform the need for PAL, then it is essential to characterize the hazard associated with these low-level exposures. For peanut, there are now published data relating to over 3000 double-blind, placebo-controlled challenges in allergic individuals, but a similar level of evidence is lacking for other priority allergens. We present the results of a rapid evidence assessment and meta-analysis for the risk of anaphylaxis to a low-level allergen exposure for priority allergens. On the basis of this analysis, we propose that peanut can and should be considered an exemplar allergen for the hazard characterization at a low-level allergen exposure.

Poor understanding of allergen labelling by allergic and non-allergic consumers.

BACKGROUND: Understanding consumers' interpretation of allergy information is crucial for effective food safety policies. We evaluated consumer understanding of allergy information on foods in controlled, experimental studies. METHOD: Using 18 packaged foods, we evaluated consumer understanding of information about allergens in two experiments: First, a comparison of foods with no stated allergen versus allergen as a stated ingredient versus a precautionary allergen label (PAL); second, a comparison of three common variants of PAL. In each experiment, consumers with and without self-reported food allergy were asked to estimate the risk of allergic reaction and to rate the comprehensibility of the allergen information. In the second experiment, consumers were also asked which form of PAL they preferred. RESULTS: Risk of reaction was assessed as high and low for foods with the allergen stated as ingredient, or without any mention of allergen. However, risk assessment for PAL varied and was judged as higher by non-allergic than allergic participants (82% vs. 58%, p < .001). Understanding of risk associated with PAL also varied by health literacy (p < .001). Both allergic and non-allergic consumers judged all forms of allergy information to be unclear, especially products with no allergy information for non-allergic consumers. Products with a 'Produced in a Factory' PAL were perceived as less risky than 'May contain' or 'Traces of' PALs (p < .001), less than 40% of participants judged PAL information to be comprehensible, and participants preferred 'May contain' over the other PALs. CONCLUSION: Both allergic and non-allergic consumers find allergen information difficult to interpret on packaged foods and misunderstand PAL, incorrectly distinguishing different risk levels for different PAL wording. Clearer allergy information guidelines are called for, and the use of only one PAL wording is recommended.

Predicting the allergenicity of legume proteins using a PBMC gene expression assay.

BACKGROUND: Food proteins differ in their allergenic potential. Currently, there is no predictive and validated bio-assay to evaluate the allergenicity of novel food proteins. The objective of this study was to investigate the potential of a human peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) gene expression assay to identify biomarkers to predict the allergenicity of legume proteins. RESULTS: PBMCs from healthy donors were exposed to weakly and strongly allergenic legume proteins (2S albumins, and 7S and 11S globulins from white bean, soybean, peanut, pea and lupine) in three experiments. Possible biomarkers for allergenicity were investigated by exposing PBMCs to a protein pair of weakly (white bean) and strongly allergenic (soybean) 7S globulins in a pilot experiment. Gene expression was measured by RNA-sequencing and differentially expressed genes were selected as biomarkers. 153 genes were identified as having significantly different expression levels to the 7S globulin of white bean compared to soybean. Inclusion of multiple protein pairs from 2S albumins (lupine and peanut) and 7S globulins (white bean and soybean) in a larger study, led to the selection of CCL2, CCL7, and RASD2 as biomarkers to distinguish weakly from strongly allergenic proteins. The relevance of these three biomarkers was confirmed by qPCR when PBMCs were exposed to a larger panel of weakly and strongly allergenic legume proteins (2S albumins, and 7S and 11S globulins from white bean, soybean, peanut, pea and lupine). CONCLUSIONS: The PBMC gene expression assay can potentially distinguish weakly from strongly allergenic legume proteins within a protein family, though it will be challenging to develop a generic method for all protein families from plant and animal sources. Graded responses within a protein family might be of more value in allergenicity prediction instead of a yes or no classification.

Ranking of 10 legumes according to the prevalence of sensitization as a parameter to characterize allergenic proteins.

Predicting the allergenicity of novel proteins is challenging due to the absence of validated predictive methods and a well-defined reference set of proteins. The prevalence of sensitization could be a parameter to select reference proteins to characterize allergenic proteins. This study investigated whether the prevalence of sensitization of legume extracts and proteins can indeed be used for this purpose. A random sample of suspected food-allergic patients (n=106) was therefore selected. 10 extracts (processed and non-processed) and 18 individual proteins (2S albumins, 7S and 11S globulins) from black lentil, blue and white lupine, chickpea, faba bean, green lentil, pea, peanut, soybean, and white bean were isolated and the prevalence of sensitization and the intensity of IgE binding were evaluated. The prevalence of sensitization ranged from 5.7 % (faba bean and green lentil) to 14.2 % (peanut). The prevalence of sensitization for individual legume proteins ranged from 0.0 % for albumin 1 (pea) to 15.1 %-17.9 % for Ara h 1, 2, 3, and 6 (peanut). The prevalence of sensitization correlated strongly with the intensity of IgE binding for individual proteins (p < 0.05, ρ = 0.894), for extracts no correlation was found. The discovered ranking can be used to select reference proteins for the development and validation of predictive in vitro or in vivo assays for the assessment of the sensitizing potential.

Allergen labelling: Current practice and improvement from a communication perspective.

BACKGROUND: Allergen information on product labels is crucial in food allergy management, though inadequacy in current labelling practices is one of the major causes for accidental reactions upon consuming prepacked food products. OBJECTIVE: This study analyses current status of communicating allergen information on food labels and provides practical recommendations for improving the label format based on communication theory. METHODS: Product labels (N 288) of seven food categories from private label products and brands were obtained at three retailers in the Netherlands. Information regarding the 14 EU-regulated allergens was evaluated by the frequency of emphasizing allergens in the ingredient list, use of precautionary allergen labelling (PAL), icons and an allergen information section. Effectiveness of communication was assessed evaluating readability and findability of information on allergens using principles of Gestalt and Cognitive Load theories. RESULTS: As requested by EU regulation 1169/2011, emphasizing allergens in the ingredient list was almost 100%, all other presentations of information on allergens on labels was highly diverse. A separate allergen information section was present on most private label products. This section could, but not necessarily did, repeat allergens from the ingredient list and/or give a PAL. Brands often provided a PAL at the end of the ingredient list. Part of the products displayed an icon at different locations of the label. Label background, a lack of cohesion and variation in location of topics hamper the identification of relevant information on allergens by (allergic) consumers. Recommendations include a standardized order for mandatory and voluntary topics on the label and a separate allergen information section. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Overall, consumers encounter a wide and inconsistent range in ways of presentation of allergen information on labels. Standardization according to basic design principles can improve usability and support safe food purchases for allergic consumers.

Digestion and Transport across the Intestinal Epithelium Affects the Allergenicity of Ara h 1 and 3 but Not of Ara h 2 and 6.

SCOPE: No accepted and validated methods are currently available which can accurately predict protein allergenicity. In this study, the role of digestion and transport on protein allergenicity is investigated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Peanut allergens (Ara h 1, 2, 3, and 6) and a milk allergen (ß-lactoglobulin) are transported across pig intestinal epithelium using the InTESTine model and afterward basophil activation is measured to assess the (remaining) functional properties. Additionally, allergens are digested by pepsin prior to epithelial transport and their allergenicity is assessed in a human mast cell activation assay. Remarkably, transported Ara h 1 and 3 are not able to activate basophils, in contrast to Ara h 2 and 6. Digestion prior to transport results in a significant increase in mast cell activation of Ara h 1 and 3 dependent on the length of digestion time. Activation of mast cells by Ara h 2 and 6 is unaffected by digestion prior to transport. CONCLUSIONS: Digestion and transport influences the allergenicity of Ara h 1 and 3, but not of Ara h 2 and 6. The influence of digestion and transport on protein allergenicity may explain why current in vitro assays are not predictive for allergenicity.

A systematic comparison of food intake data of the United States and the Netherlands for food allergen risk assessment.

National population-based food consumption surveys are used in food allergen risk assessment. It would be beneficial if food intake data is interchangeable between countries to bridge potential gaps present in national survey data, which is only possible when risk assessment outcomes for comparable food product groups between countries are fairly similar. Additionally, merged food intake data would enable risk assessments that cover scenarios for various countries, if based on the most critical situation. Therefore, we systematically compared risk assessment outcomes for a broad range of food groups based on United States and Dutch population food consumption survey data. We calculated risks for 14 allergenic foods for 9 concentrations (1-10,000 ppm) to assess comparability. Depending on the assumed allergen concentration, risk assessment outcomes for 20% (10 out of 49) food groups differed considerably. We consider the number of potentially relevant risk differences too high to conclude that food intake data from the US and The Netherlands can be used interchangeably. To allow risk assessments that cover scenarios for several countries, we recommend development and use of a food intake dataset based on the highest intake levels for each food group of the involved countries to facilitate risk management efforts and harmonization.

Full range of population Eliciting Dose values for 14 priority allergenic foods and recommendations for use in risk characterization.

Previously, we published selected Eliciting Dose (ED) values (i.e. ED01 and ED05 values) for 14 allergenic foods, predicted to elicit objective allergic symptoms in 1% and 5%, respectively, of the allergic population (Remington et al., 2020). These ED01 and ED05 values were specifically presented and discussed in the context of establishing Reference Doses for allergen management and the calculation of Action Levels for Precautionary Allergen Labeling (PAL). In the current paper, we publish the full range of ED values for these allergenic foods and provide recommendations for their use, specifically in the context of characterizing risks of concentrations of (unintended) allergenic proteins in food products. The data provided in this publication give risk assessors access to full population ED distribution information for 14 priority allergenic foods, based on the largest threshold database worldwide. The ED distributions were established using broad international consensus regarding suitable datapoints and methods for establishing individual patient's NOAELs and LOAELs and state of the art statistical modelling. Access to these ED data enables risk assessors to use this information for state-of-the-art food allergen risk assessment. This paper contributes to a harmonization of food allergen risk assessment and risk management and PAL practices.

Allergen risk assessment: Food intake levels of the general population represent those of food allergic patients.

Unintentional intake of allergens through food products poses a daily risk for allergic patients. Models estimating the risk of reactions mostly use intake data from general population surveys. Our study evaluates the comparability of food intake levels in the general population to those in the food allergic population. Data were collected by a 24-h recall method on 2 non-consecutive days in 38 cow's milk and/or hen's egg and 35 peanut and/or tree nut allergic adult patients. All products were assigned to food groups previously developed for allergen risk assessment. Food intake distributions from the allergic populations and a matched sample from the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey were compared, and risk assessments were performed. Food intake data was obtained for 92% of the food groups. Comparison of the intake showed no statistically significant differences between either of the two allergic populations and the general population. Consequently, only small variations in estimated risks were found, that would not result in different risk management decisions. In conclusion, food intake data from the general population can be used for food allergen risk assessment and will not lead to a relevant under- or overestimation of the risk for the food allergic population.